The Federal Reserve has heard arguments from crypto companies and banking associations on a proposal to allow so-called “skinny master accounts,” which would give fintech firms limited access to the central bank’s payments infrastructure.
The Fed received 44 comments in response to its proposal, which closed on Friday, seeking feedback on offering a “payment account,” with crypto companies backing the idea and banks urging caution.
In opening up comments on the proposal in December, Fed Governor Christopher Waller said the new payment accounts were needed due to “rapid developments” in payments and that they would “support innovation while keeping the payments system safe.”
Payment accounts won’t have the same privileges as master accounts (commonly owned by big banks) — they wouldn’t earn interest or be given access to Fed credit and would have balance limits.
Crypto backs getting accounts
In response to the proposal, stablecoin issuer Circle said in a letter that the accounts would “play an important first step in carrying forward Congress’ vision under the GENIUS Act” and argued they would “materially strengthen US payments.”
The recently formed Blockchain Payments Consortium called the accounts an “overdue and much-welcomed addition” that it said would “eliminate uncompetitive practices that undercut consumers and concentrate risk around a handful of banks.”
Anchorage Digital Bank, the country’s first federally chartered crypto bank, said that “specific deficiencies” in the proposal must be addressed regarding overnight balance limits, interest on reserves and access to the Fed’s automated clearing house.
The Fed floated setting an overnight balance limit at the lesser of $500 million or 10% of the account holder’s total assets and would not give interest on account balances or allow access to its clearing house, which offers same-day and international payments.
Banks raise concerns about access to Fed system
However, multiple banking associations responded to the Fed with concerns about allowing different entities into the central banking system.
The American Bankers Association said that many of the entities that would be eligible for a payment account “lack a long-run supervisory track record, are not subject to consistent federal safety-and-soundness standards and may rely on evolving statutory or regulatory regimes.”
Related: CFTC expands payment stablecoin criteria to include national trust banks
The Wisconsin Bankers Association said that it believes access to the accounts “should depend not only on legal eligibility, but also on an institution’s demonstrated capabilities in governance, risk management, internal controls, and compliance.”
Better Markets, a nonpartisan organization that lobbies for financial reform, called the payment accounts an “irresponsible and reckless giveaway to the crypto industry” that should be rescinded.
The group said the accounts would “implicitly and unnecessarily” expand the Fed’s mandate and that the types of companies that would request access to such accounts “present huge risks to the Federal Reserve System and the financial system.”
The Fed will consider the feedback before it makes a final rule on its proposal, which could take months.
Magazine: How crypto laws changed in 2025 — and how they’ll change in 2026